General Discussion

Pretzel_Warrior

(8,361 posts)

196. ahh...linking to an article from Glenn Greenwald who admits he's not objective right in his piece

Tue Oct 22, 2013, 01:18 PM

Oct 2013

when he says the group he founded was responsible for drafting and trying to get funded the primary challenger to Blanche Lincoln. I don't trust Glenn Greenwald. He could very easily have gotten the seat taken away from Dems in Arkansas for all we know.

Obama has shown support for the poor, those without health care, GLBT, and immigrants. That is a far cry more than any Republican or Democrat in the past 40+ years. Including Bill Clinton who was Republican Lite compared to Obama.

The funny thing is....a lot of liberals are as guilty of manufacturing "Monster Obama" as the right wingers are. It's just your "Monster Obama" is GONNA do all this horrible stuff. You just know it. Meanwhile, he's not. The tireless whining and working against our president is getting old.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

223 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

President Obama is a decent man. He's no FDR and we sorely need an FDR [View all] cali Oct 2013 OP

We thank you for your tepid support Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #1

You almost have to admire the level of relentlessly consistent negativism. 11 Bravo Oct 2013 #6

It's called dealing with reality. cali Oct 2013 #17

It can be called a lot of things, reality is not one of them krawhitham Oct 2013 #207

Also have to admire the level of relentless dissent squashing from the fanboi faction .... Myrina Oct 2013 #41

Or they see the thread at top of the page and offer their opinion Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #55

Um, progressoid Oct 2013 #67

You snarked in the plural 'we thank you'. What is that about? Bluenorthwest Oct 2013 #96

Maybe he has a fabulous pink pony. n/t QC Oct 2013 #159

energizer bunny sex reddread Oct 2013 #90

+ 1 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 kestrel91316 Oct 2013 #178

Why yes, yes you do. Especially this sort: cui bono Oct 2013 #195

lol Renew Deal Oct 2013 #68

FDR had 300+ in the House and 70+ in the Senate. JaneyVee Oct 2013 #85

Obama vetoes: 4. FDR vetoes: 635 nt Bonobo Oct 2013 #140

Because Republicans aren't concerned with writing legislation, only blocking it. JaneyVee Oct 2013 #144

And how many total bills have passed the 113th United States Congress? krawhitham Oct 2013 #208

FDR's vetoes of reparations for Indians... yay. joshcryer Oct 2013 #210

Have you thanked Obama for HIS tepid support? cui bono Oct 2013 #194

ahh...linking to an article from Glenn Greenwald who admits he's not objective right in his piece Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #196

So you're going to discount something that actually happened simply because GG wrote it? cui bono Oct 2013 #197

Clinton. NAFTA and Telecommunications Act of 1996. Among others. Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #198

I'm not defending Clinton. You sure like to try to change the topic, don't you? cui bono Oct 2013 #199

woops! I guess you is WRONG! but you must be used to it by now Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #200

Eliabeth Warren race wasn't a primary and the youtube clip is from 2006, when Obama was campaigning cui bono Oct 2013 #202

Better a good, principled Democratic President, than a failed Deal Maker. leveymg Oct 2013 #2

Maybe someday we will actually get that choice on our ballot. Agnosticsherbet Oct 2013 #4

Better a pragmatic progressive than a "pure" president who gets nothing passed Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #5

There's no danger of a "pure" anything in DC. Obama does need to hold to some basic principles - leveymg Oct 2013 #12

He's not a progressive. not when it comes to economics- as bernie points out. cali Oct 2013 #18

Some have redefined "progressive" as anything to the left of the TeaBagger Party. rhett o rick Oct 2013 #70

Who gets to define "progressive"? tridim Oct 2013 #102

Is this a guessing game? If you have something to say, why dont you speak out instead rhett o rick Oct 2013 #109

LOL. Difficult question huh? tridim Oct 2013 #114

The definition of a Progressive isnt "someone that makes progress." rhett o rick Oct 2013 #120

Agreed. He put Wall Street in the WH ffs. And offered up SS cuts. cui bono Oct 2013 #135

I agree that those people are progressives... tridim Oct 2013 #161

Playing word games on message boards isn't progressive. n/t cui bono Oct 2013 #134

I guess you don't want to answer either. tridim Oct 2013 #162

Why dont you try making statements instead of asking questions? Dont be afraid to rhett o rick Oct 2013 #209

"New Democrat"ic Corporatists have been purposefully misapplying the label "progressive" Dragonfli Oct 2013 #131

CIA officers brisas2k Oct 2013 #152

Hey I would take that pragmatic progressive over the pragmatic centrist we have. cui bono Oct 2013 #133

So who won? SamYeager Oct 2013 #3

The "when" may have been in question, but the "who" was a foregone conclusion. 11 Bravo Oct 2013 #9

Not even here 10 days and you got a pool going. Impressive. nt laundry_queen Oct 2013 #113

Reality is a downer. cui bono Oct 2013 #136

no way, we could do a hell of a lot better than Obama quinnox Oct 2013 #7

I wouldn't characterize FDR as "fire breathing". cali Oct 2013 #19

Really? jeff47 Oct 2013 #56

one- or ten- comments hardly weigh more than the thousands that cali Oct 2013 #74

Such as? jeff47 Oct 2013 #78

Pressure from the left MyshkinCommaPrince Oct 2013 #8

+1 Without an actual Left, there will be no FDRs leftstreet Oct 2013 #16

not to mention squashing the "do gooders" reddread Oct 2013 #91

How can there be an actual left laundry_queen Oct 2013 #115

Well, this isn't actually that liberal of a board. n/t cui bono Oct 2013 #137

Unfortunatley not. Yet according to the TOS, it is supposed to be. Dark n Stormy Knight Oct 2013 #150

DU list of exceptions disqualifies all but blue-dog democrats. brisas2k Oct 2013 #156

I disagree. The TOS excludes the most radical of the left, and there are really few of them in Dark n Stormy Knight Oct 2013 #158

I totally agree. n/t cui bono Oct 2013 #192

Yes, we need a loud left. And yet there are attempts at every level to keep that from happening. cui bono Oct 2013 #138

As I noted before, Benton D Struckcheon Oct 2013 #10

We don't need FDR so much as the House and Senate that existed when FDR was President. stevenleser Oct 2013 #11

We've had divided Gov't during most of the post-war era, yet things got done leveymg Oct 2013 #29

Things got done during this President's terms too. Just not FDR level, no one else has gotten FDR stevenleser Oct 2013 #35

We need another New Deal, and haven't gotten it under Obama. leveymg Oct 2013 #44

We wouldn't have gotten the original New Deal with this congress. stevenleser Oct 2013 #60

He did have the chance in 2009. Benton D Struckcheon Oct 2013 #76

No, he didn't. Just enough members of the Democratic Senate weren't interested. nt stevenleser Oct 2013 #95

Seems like there are ALWAYS "just enough" to ensure the agenda of the 1%, doesn't it. bvar22 Oct 2013 #188

Good info to file away for future use. Thanks! n/t cui bono Oct 2013 #193

Um. The vote needed more than just Blanche Lincoln. joshcryer Oct 2013 #213

There's a great DU game one can play on their smartphone... SidDithers Oct 2013 #215

I am familiar with this game. joshcryer Oct 2013 #216

Your reply is the classic Strawman. bvar22 Oct 2013 #219

+1 The electoral game is rigged, and the casino owners almost always win. leveymg Oct 2013 #214

As a mere technicality, he did. joshcryer Oct 2013 #212

there was also a bogeyman needed, and FDR got it. brisas2k Oct 2013 #157

im sure that would sail right throug the house arely staircase Oct 2013 #92

This reality gap some have is pretty stunning really... stevenleser Oct 2013 #105

I for one blame the GOP, too! babylonsister Oct 2013 #108

It was like 39 days when Obama had the 60 vote majority in the Senate. joshcryer Oct 2013 #211

+1 billion treestar Oct 2013 #127

FDR was criticized by the left in his day as not liberal enough, NYC Liberal Oct 2013 #13

FDR was considered a class traitor datasuspect Oct 2013 #15

Yes by reasonable people. There was a not insignificant NYC Liberal Oct 2013 #21

FDR wasn't FDR zipplewrath Oct 2013 #43

lol. FDR was reviled by the moneyed classes. cali Oct 2013 #23

Yes he was. And your point is? NYC Liberal Oct 2013 #34

No offense to Mrs. Obama, but the Prez doesn't have an outspoken radical liberal Zorra Oct 2013 #14

ABSOLUTELY! I held High Hopes for MICHELLE to be "Eleanor Roosevelt" KoKo Oct 2013 #103

On what planet would this even have been possible? The black FLOTUS... Hekate Oct 2013 #145

Yeh. We need to make a focused, sustained effort at rooting out the PPI/Third Way Zorra Oct 2013 #185

Recommend! KoKo Oct 2013 #206

Did FDR have a teabagger controlled congress? nt ecstatic Oct 2013 #20

No, FDR STARTED with an 83% progressive congress and had an avg of 70% throughout terms in office uponit7771 Oct 2013 #31

Something that is conveniently forgotten. NYC Liberal Oct 2013 #39

I love how people assume that the major difference between geek tragedy Oct 2013 #22

I'm not ignoring Congress- it's in the op in my reference to other politicians cali Oct 2013 #26

FDR couldn't have led the tea party Congress. No way. n/t pnwmom Oct 2013 #46

When FDR faced filibusters, care to guess whether he: geek tragedy Oct 2013 #53

The bully pulpit matters much less now than it once did. The name should probably be changed. stevenleser Oct 2013 #57

You're just not being very realistic. Pretty typical Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #97

Organized labor & a political left had power then leftstreet Oct 2013 #33

Southern white racists voted Democratic back then. geek tragedy Oct 2013 #54

That has nothing to do with what I said n/t leftstreet Oct 2013 #62

What. Reality doesn't matter. If President Obama was to be the equivalent of FDR, he would have bluestate10 Oct 2013 #111

Post removed Post removed Oct 2013 #24

because I don't drool with adoration? fuck that. cali Oct 2013 #36

Got it. It's not adoration, you drool with disdain. Either way, you really need to wipe your chin. 11 Bravo Oct 2013 #75

amen trumad rbrnmw Oct 2013 #51

******OBAMA NEEDS AN FDR CONGRESS!!!********* FDR had 70% progressives, Obama does NOT uponit7771 Oct 2013 #25

Then he should stop working against one zipplewrath Oct 2013 #47

Absolutely, very important point, and I'll add one. Jim Lane Oct 2013 #77

Obama is working Against an 83% dem congress!!?!?!?!? Come on people!!! uponit7771 Oct 2013 #99

Against a progressive congress zipplewrath Oct 2013 #165

You mean the congress that filibustered dem measures over 300 times is progressive?! You're saying uponit7771 Oct 2013 #168

You're projecting zipplewrath Oct 2013 #169

I don't agree with Obama preferred much more conservative democrats at all, please show proof of thi uponit7771 Oct 2013 #174

Specter and Lincoln zipplewrath Oct 2013 #180

Nonsense! Lincoln and Specter voted for all his major legislation. bornskeptic Oct 2013 #173

Can't have it both ways zipplewrath Oct 2013 #177

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ NYC_SKP Oct 2013 #94

Facts ate not appreciated in ODS diatribe threads Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #98

Obama vetoes: 4. FDR vetoes: 635 nt Bonobo Oct 2013 #141

Obama terms in office: 2. FDR terms: almost 4. Hekate Oct 2013 #146

++++ The Wielding Truth Oct 2013 #101

You are wrong, most of FDR's support came from racists from all parts of the country. Those bluestate10 Oct 2013 #112

Umm, no... progressive doesn't equal perfect now and does equal perfect then and that's what's uponit7771 Oct 2013 #123

President Obama is far superior to his critics... even the ones on the left. nt BluegrassStateBlues Oct 2013 #27

Actually, ProSense Oct 2013 #28

yes, indeed. I'll take your propaganda over Bernie's facts. NOT. cali Oct 2013 #37

What the hell are you talking about? ProSense Oct 2013 #40

Don't destroy them with facts. BluegrassStateBlues Oct 2013 #45

But in fact Heritage applauds the President's stand on the NSA. Heritage loves rhett o rick Oct 2013 #143

An error in that zipplewrath Oct 2013 #58

"Medicare Part D can't negotiate." ProSense Oct 2013 #61

So to summarize zipplewrath Oct 2013 #79

What the hell? Medicaid is not Medicare. n/t ProSense Oct 2013 #81

And water is not dirt zipplewrath Oct 2013 #82

It's called a rebate. ProSense Oct 2013 #84

So what was wrong with my summary? nt zipplewrath Oct 2013 #166

What we need is a different House. FDR wouldn't have been able pnwmom Oct 2013 #30

+1, FDR had an 75% avg dem house throughout his term(s) uponit7771 Oct 2013 #32

A House that's willing to piss away 24 billion dollars and throw people out of work. randome Oct 2013 #38

Even opposition Houses wouldn't have pulled the shutdown debt default treestar Oct 2013 #128

And what we have now is Democratic Party unity. BluegrassStateBlues Oct 2013 #42

Send him the Congress FDR had, to balance the scales. The GOP didn't shut down the gov't then Hekate Oct 2013 #48

President Obama is good and decent man and I love him rbrnmw Oct 2013 #49

You're right--Obama is running waaaaay behind on interring Japanese Americans. Orrex Oct 2013 #50

We still have time, despair not! Puzzledtraveller Oct 2013 #52

He just needs two more terms and a World War Hekate Oct 2013 #148

Damn right. When are we going to send Americans of some national heritage MineralMan Oct 2013 #59

I find it truly amazing how a politician who was full of warts become lionized with time. bluestate10 Oct 2013 #116

These same folks will be doing the same thing with Obama in 20 years. Number23 Oct 2013 #125

+1 Couldn't have said it better Hekate Oct 2013 #147

It's hilarious that the biggest feel-good some can take away is Obama is not FDR ProSense Oct 2013 #170

+a billion bravenak Oct 2013 #176

FDR has the benefit of time. In fact, there are very few MineralMan Oct 2013 #167

Many historians believe FDR saved capitalism. The Velveteen Ocelot Oct 2013 #63

More than a Superman to lead us, we NEED a revival of traditional Democratic Values. bvar22 Oct 2013 #64

Well done ! Thanks for the post. russspeakeasy Oct 2013 #66

'Basic Human Rights, not commodities to be sold'. Excellent sabrina 1 Oct 2013 #69

Kudos for this great post! n/t truedelphi Oct 2013 #73

+ 1,000,000,000... And, THAT Shows You How Far To The Right We've Moved Since Those Days... WillyT Oct 2013 #104

+1 cui bono Oct 2013 #139

Any minute now you'll get flamed for calling these things "rights.' Here on a supposedly liberal Dark n Stormy Knight Oct 2013 #153

You always seem to be searching for a reason to be sad. grantcart Oct 2013 #65

Very interesting post. Old and In the Way Oct 2013 #203

"I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him." MineralMan Oct 2013 #71

Is he dead? zipplewrath Oct 2013 #83

and? you remind me of nothing so much as a slow boiled frog. cali Oct 2013 #88

frog soup reddread Oct 2013 #93

Ah, sheep's heads. I haven't seen one of those MineralMan Oct 2013 #175

The water doesnt have to come to a boil slowly if the frog is in denial. Just sayin. nm rhett o rick Oct 2013 #142

Puzzled as to why someone who has handed our economy over to the Biggest of the Bankers truedelphi Oct 2013 #72

FDR was born rich + he knew many rich were AWFUL humans. pansypoo53219 Oct 2013 #80

I guess Personal Attacks and snarky attempts to discredit the messenger... bvar22 Oct 2013 #86

thank you bvar. I won't shut up cali Oct 2013 #87

Good. I live reality. 840high Oct 2013 #124

+ 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!! - K & R !!! WillyT Oct 2013 #118

Amen! nt dflprincess Oct 2013 #121

+1 nt laundry_queen Oct 2013 #122

Wow, tough crowd! Rex Oct 2013 #89

I think Obama has been pretty amazing . . . Brigid Oct 2013 #100

Let's think on this...did FDR make the changes he made on his own or with others? vaberella Oct 2013 #106

Ahhhh, the romanticized FDR. A bit like the romanticized Reagan for the right. bluestate10 Oct 2013 #107

Want America to move towards the progressive side? Get out there and start workin on it! struggle4progress Oct 2013 #110

We need a populist prez but our corporate parties aren't primarily about the people... polichick Oct 2013 #117

FDR wasn't FDR and I was taught to idolize him, He was Joe Montana orpupilofnature57 Oct 2013 #119

We need a Democratic Congress nt treestar Oct 2013 #126

We don't need another white man in power BlueToTheBone Oct 2013 #129

Obama vetoes: 4. FDR vetoes: 635 MannyGoldstein Oct 2013 #130

FDR is dead... Jeff In Milwaukee Oct 2013 #132

Kicked and Recommended! Enthusiast Oct 2013 #149

FDR had an all-Democratic Congress. Remember that. He is only ONE branch of government. RBInMaine Oct 2013 #151

damn Cali, I bet you were the kid that told the other kids that there is no such thing as Santa Douglas Carpenter Oct 2013 #154

Nope. I was a big Santa fan even when I knew it wasn't true cali Oct 2013 #164

2009 was the opportunity. PeteSelman Oct 2013 #155

and THAT kind of opportunity comes around once in a generation. bvar22 Oct 2013 #190

I think you place too much at the feet of Obama and don't look at the other factors davidpdx Oct 2013 #160

President Obama is a decent man. He's no FDR and we sorely need an FDR aidendaniel Oct 2013 #163

welcome to DU gopiscrap Oct 2013 #172

If Americans had been demanding an FDR, our president would have become one. Orsino Oct 2013 #171

Tepid Public Support? bvar22 Oct 2013 #205

Yes, tepid public support... Orsino Oct 2013 #217

-Rev Martin Luther King Jr. bvar22 Oct 2013 #220

The strongly favorable polling hasn't yet translated... Orsino Oct 2013 #221

-Rev Martin Luther King Jr. bvar22 Oct 2013 #222

If you're wishing that the president would lead more, you're far from alone. n/t Orsino Oct 2013 #223

You only have to put up with about 3 more years of Obama. JoePhilly Oct 2013 #179

ooh, you have a crystal ball. sorry, I don't believe in your cali Oct 2013 #182

What ever happens, I predict that you'll be here to tell us why its terrible. JoePhilly Oct 2013 #183

another silly prediction from you. you seem to specialize in them joey cali Oct 2013 #189

I also tend to be right most of the time, which makes it even more fun for me. JoePhilly Oct 2013 #191

in your own mind and there it stops, joey. cali Oct 2013 #218

Internment camps. FDR had those. bravenak Oct 2013 #181

Yep. FDR turned his back on Jim Crow laws and Lynchings of Blacks in the South n/t Yavin4 Oct 2013 #186

That's why I don't understand why there are those that think Pres.Obama is lacking in comparison. bravenak Oct 2013 #187

No. Obama needs the same super majority in Congress that FDR enjoyed. stopbush Oct 2013 #184

-100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #201

No Sale. Old and In the Way Oct 2013 #204